Premium
Acoustic characterization of Mysis relicta
Author(s) -
Gal Gideon,
Rudstam Lars G.,
Greene Charles H.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
limnology and oceanography
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.7
H-Index - 197
eISSN - 1939-5590
pISSN - 0024-3590
DOI - 10.4319/lo.1999.44.2.0371
Subject(s) - zooplankton , pelagic zone , benthic zone , plankton , oceanography , abundance (ecology) , environmental science , sampling (signal processing) , marine invertebrates , range (aeronautics) , target strength , diel vertical migration , invertebrate , in situ , ecology , biology , geology , fish <actinopterygii> , fishery , physics , meteorology , materials science , detector , optics , composite material
It is possible to increase the sampling resolution and the available information on zooplankton populations by applying acoustic sampling techniques. Knowledge of an organism's acoustic target strength (TS) is critical for translating acoustic data into meaningful biological information, such as numerical abundance. We have taken several approaches to evaluate the acoustic TS of Mysis relicta , a key benthic‐pelagic invertebrate in the Laurentian Great Lakes. This included in situ TS measurements with a dual‐beam 420‐kHz system and comparison among net‐based, optical plankton counter (OPC)‐based, and acoustic‐based estimates of numerical abundance of mysids. In addition, based on the in situ TS data, we modified a model previously applied primarily to marine zooplankton taxa. The resulting predicted TS was compared to other TS estimates. The estimated mean TSs from the in situ TS measurements and the OPC‐acoustic comparison were within a narrow range (–76 to –74.8 dB). Analysis of the net‐acoustic data comparison resulted in an estimated average TS of –73.1 dB. We suggest that the net‐acoustic discrepancy relative to other methods is due to net avoidance and low filtering efficiency. The model predicted similar mean TSs for the size distribution present when R (reflectivity coefficient) was changed to 0.0675. We hypothesized that the modification of the model parameter values was necessary because of the differences in the medium surrounding marine vs. freshwater zooplankton.